post FOSDEM

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
56 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

post FOSDEM

Gabor Szabo
Hi Gervase  and everyone else on the list,

Gervase,
it was nice meeting you on FOSDEM and thanks for the short overview
of where Bugzilla stands.

Unfortunately there was no Bugzilla related action on FOSDEM but I have
not gave up trying to have more cooperation between the Bugzilla
developers and the Perl community but I need your help as well.

So where do you people think the Perl community could help Bugzilla?

Gabor
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Max Kanat-Alexander
On 02/10/2010 05:34 AM, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> So where do you people think the Perl community could help Bugzilla?

        Hmm, if you could send some developers our way, that would certainly be
helpful! :-) We're very helpful to people who are relatively-new Perl
coders, and we have a pretty good introductory system for getting into
coding on Bugzilla, so you're welcome to advertise Bugzilla as a Perl
project that's friendly to relatively-new developers. (Though they do
have to be able to read and write Object-Oriented Perl.)

        -Max
--
http://www.everythingsolved.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too.
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Gervase Markham
In reply to this post by Gabor Szabo
On 10/02/10 13:34, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> So where do you people think the Perl community could help Bugzilla?

Hi Gabor,

It was great to meet you at FOSDEM too.

IMO, the Bugzilla community is most in need of additional developers.
Where in the Perl community might we ask to see if anyone is interested
in lending a hand?

Other than that, did you have any ideas about how we could collaborate
better?

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Nitish Bezzala
Hi Gabor,

Can you please tell us what you think attracted so many developers to Padre?
Maybe, we'll be able to borrow some ideas from you...

Thanks,
Nitish



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Gabor Szabo
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Nitish Bezzala <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi Gabor,
>
> Can you please tell us what you think attracted so many developers to Padre?
> Maybe, we'll be able to borrow some ideas from you...
> Thanks,
> Nitish

I basically just got lucky that I started a project that seemed to be
interesting to some developers but as this happened now I try to play
the expert on the subject.

Also I think it is much easier to make people enthusiastic about a new
project than an existing project that has been in use for more than 10
years.

So please take my suggestions with the appropriate grain of salt.

Anyway, I think the main issue was *publicity* and my earlier
involvement in the Perl community helped in that. I gave a talk about
it on FOSDEM last week but managed to use more time than allocated so
I skipped the most 2-3 import slides which said:

Publicity:
- blog about your project
- talk about it on YAPCs, Perl Workshops, Perl Monger meetings, wherever you can
- encourage other developers and users to blog about it and talk about it.

Create positive feeling towards your project.

Regarding Bugzilla:

I still recall this blog entry:
http://avatraxiom.livejournal.com/58084.html and the discussion it
created on http://use.perl.org/~TeeJay/journal/33269

Maybe it is just me and no one of the other use.perl.org readers think
the same but I am still not sure if the Bugzilla team likes the fact
that it is written in Perl or that you hate every inch of it?

IMHO this image need to be changed if you'd like to attract people to
work on Bugzilla.

For one thing if the Bugzilla web site (and the product itself) was
proudly saying that it is based on Perl (with logo, link to
www.perl.org) that would certainly start creating some warm feelings
in the community.
That would also help drive more people in the direction of Perl.
(e.g. see how every mailman installation has the Python icon even
here: http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/ )

Also - again IMHO - Bugzilla needs to send the message of using
*modern tools* in its development. (e.g. CVS  still being the
recommended way to fetch the source code is NOT sending this
messages). While I think Git would have been a more attractive vcs for
many perl developers I think Bazar is also good in being modern.
(And I am still using SVN for most of my stuff.)

Make it familiar to CPAN authors and people who are used to the CPAN
style stuff.
e.g.
I was happy to see that you are using Test::More but some items I saw
were not as I would expect

the local::lib/PERL5LIB stuff I am trying to patch,
not using Makefile.PL or Build.PL,
not using "standard" CPAN layout:
   modules in    ROOT/lib/
   command line scripts in       ROOT/script
   cgi scripts in some other directory (e.g. I use ROOT/www)

I'll try to allocate some time and look at the project to give you
more unwanted suggestions and maybe even a few patches.

I think if you would like to attract more people from that community
you should start blogging about Bugzilla and how its Perl code works.
What are your main challenges in the code base, what are you going to
do about it. How people could get involved.
I personally will try to see how Bugzilla is tested.


I am not sure if it should be done on http://bugzillaupdate.wordpress.com/
or on some other blog (maybe on http://blogs.perl.org/ ) but I am quite sure
the entires should appear on both http://ironman.enlightenedperl.org/ and on
http://perlsphere.net/ that are read by many people.


I am sorry if this got a bit too long and if it sounds too paternalistic
but the project I started is called Padre, so you might blame it on that ;-)

regards
   Gabor
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Gervase Markham
In reply to this post by Nitish Bezzala
On 11/02/10 22:22, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> Maybe it is just me and no one of the other use.perl.org readers think
> the same but I am still not sure if the Bugzilla team likes the fact
> that it is written in Perl or that you hate every inch of it?

I personally am very happy it's written in Perl.

I have experience using Catalyst for the BzAPI project
(https://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:REST_API) and I would second the
comments of those who say it is extremely poorly documented. I even
bought the book "The Definitive Guide to Catalyst" and thought I could
take them to the Advertising Standards Authority about both the words
"Definitive" and "Guide". It was terrible.

> For one thing if the Bugzilla web site (and the product itself) was
> proudly saying that it is based on Perl (with logo, link to
> www.perl.org) that would certainly start creating some warm feelings
> in the community.

I'd be happy to see that.

> Also - again IMHO - Bugzilla needs to send the message of using
> *modern tools* in its development. (e.g. CVS  still being the
> recommended way to fetch the source code is NOT sending this
> messages).

I agree. We have switched to bzr for development, and should be
recommending this to everyone, even anonymous checkers-out.

We use a product called Bugzilla for bug tracking - do you think that's
modern enough?

;-P

> not using Makefile.PL or Build.PL,

Could you explain a bit more about what we would be using them for? We
don't have any compiled bits...

> not using "standard" CPAN layout:
>    modules in    ROOT/lib/
>    command line scripts in       ROOT/script
>    cgi scripts in some other directory (e.g. I use ROOT/www)

Now that we are in a proper SCM, moving files around has suddenly got a
whole lot easier. I guess the issue with switching to this layout is
that everyone upgrading would have to change their Apache configuration.
Wouldn't they?

> I'll try to allocate some time and look at the project to give you
> more unwanted suggestions and maybe even a few patches.

Thank you :-)

> I think if you would like to attract more people from that community
> you should start blogging about Bugzilla and how its Perl code works.
> What are your main challenges in the code base, what are you going to
> do about it. How people could get involved.

Sounds great.

> I am not sure if it should be done on http://bugzillaupdate.wordpress.com/
> or on some other blog (maybe on http://blogs.perl.org/ ) but I am quite sure
> the entires should appear on both http://ironman.enlightenedperl.org/ and on
> http://perlsphere.net/ that are read by many people.

Are those aggregators? I'm sure we could submit the Bugzilla updates
blog to them.

> I am sorry if this got a bit too long and if it sounds too paternalistic
> but the project I started is called Padre, so you might blame it on that ;-)

Everyone's opinion, politely expressed, is welcome.

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Gabor Szabo
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Gervase Markham <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 11/02/10 22:22, Gabor Szabo wrote:

> We use a product called Bugzilla for bug tracking - do you think that's
> modern enough?
>
> ;-P

We'll discuss this separately ;-)


>> not using Makefile.PL or Build.PL,
>
> Could you explain a bit more about what we would be using them for? We
> don't have any compiled bits...
>
>> not using "standard" CPAN layout:
>>    modules in    ROOT/lib/
>>    command line scripts in       ROOT/script
>>    cgi scripts in some other directory (e.g. I use ROOT/www)
>
> Now that we are in a proper SCM, moving files around has suddenly got a
> whole lot easier. I guess the issue with switching to this layout is
> that everyone upgrading would have to change their Apache configuration.
> Wouldn't they?

I guess yes.

The advantage of the slight reorganization of the layout and the addition of
Makefile.PL or Build.PL is that then Bugzilla could be packaged to be uploaded
to CPAN just as any other CPAN distribution and then you would gain the
various additional features the CPAN ecosystem provides and the mind-share (!)
of the CPAN authors.
e.g. you would automatically get and RT queue.
Err. That might not be so convincing :-)
But you would get the reporting of the CPAN Testers which can be very nice.

With some more work the installation of Bugzilla might be changed so that in
addition to the current way it will also work using

cpan> install Bugzilla

Again, I think this will raise karma of Bugzilla among the CPAN authors.

Of course blogging about the plan, and then about the execution would
further help.

(There is a notion called GrayPAN and BlackPAN - relating to code that
is either open source but not on CPAN or to code that is behind corporate
firewall. Moving Bugzilla from GrayPAN to CPAN would allow it to be
included in various automatic analytical systems)
e.g. see http://ali.as/top100/index.html


>> I am not sure if it should be done on http://bugzillaupdate.wordpress.com/
>> or on some other blog (maybe on http://blogs.perl.org/ ) but I am quite sure
>> the entires should appear on both http://ironman.enlightenedperl.org/ and on
>> http://perlsphere.net/ that are read by many people.
>
> Are those aggregators? I'm sure we could submit the Bugzilla updates
> blog to them.

Yes, http://ironman.enlightenedperl.org/ and  http://perlsphere.net/ are
blog aggregators and especially the former one is now very central to the
core perl readers. Lots of discussion is going on there.


Gabor
ps. Why do the replyes go to both
[hidden email] and on [hidden email] ?
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Max Kanat-Alexander
In reply to this post by Gabor Szabo
On 02/11/2010 02:22 PM, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> Maybe it is just me and no one of the other use.perl.org readers think
> the same but I am still not sure if the Bugzilla team likes the fact
> that it is written in Perl or that you hate every inch of it?

        I think that we talked about this in one of our Bugzilla Meetings, and
basically, Bugzilla is written in Perl, and it's written in Perl no
matter whether each of us loves it or hates it. Perl has some awesome
things about it, and some bad things about it. (By the way, as a side
note, every programmer should have experience writing professionally in
multiple languages, so that they can understand what's good about each
language and what's bad about it--with only single-language experience
it's hard to make such a judgment.)

        It's a programming language, a tool to and end. I don't think it's an
emotional issue, it's just a technical fact that Bugzilla is in Perl.

> Also - again IMHO - Bugzilla needs to send the message of using
> *modern tools* in its development. (e.g. CVS  still being the
> recommended way to fetch the source code is NOT sending this
> messages).

        The switch happened just days ago, and pretty much all the developer
documentation is written by me, in addition to almost all the
administrative details of the project being done by me, in addition to
50% or more of the development of the project being done by me, and I'm
not getting paid for any of it. So yes, I agree that the documentation
needs to be fixed, and it will be done soon.

        However, CVS is still going to be easier for some people than bzr,
because far more people are familiar with CVS. So we'll keep around some
CVS instructions as well.

> the local::lib/PERL5LIB stuff I am trying to patch,

        You're actually the first person ever to mention a problem with it, I
believe. :-) Otherwise we would have fixed it earlier.

> not using Makefile.PL or Build.PL,
> not using "standard" CPAN layout:

        Mmm, I tend to think that, at the moment, installation would actually
become more difficult than it is now, with Module::Install, particularly
on Windows. There have been a few other people who have made this
suggestion when they were new to Bugzilla, but usually as people become
more familiar with the codebase, the community, and Bugzilla's install
process on various platforms, they see that it's better the way that it
is. However, if you can demonstrate to us that in the context of
Bugzilla's userbase and community, that there would be significant
technical advantages to restructuring to a more normal CPAN layout, then
it's something that we could certainly do now, since we're using a VCS
that understands renames. It would be a lot of work and a big change for
us, though, so we'd definitely want to see some strong technical advantages.

> I'll try to allocate some time and look at the project to give you
> more unwanted suggestions and maybe even a few patches.

        Hahahaha. Your suggestions are not unwanted at all, I'm really glad to
have them, personally. :-)

> I am not sure if it should be done on http://bugzillaupdate.wordpress.com/
> or on some other blog (maybe on http://blogs.perl.org/ ) but I am quite sure
> the entires should appear on both http://ironman.enlightenedperl.org/ and on
> http://perlsphere.net/ that are read by many people.

        This is certainly something to think about, and it's cool to have
experienced suggestions from somebody with good experience in the area.

        -Max
--
http://www.everythingsolved.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too.
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Max Kanat-Alexander
In reply to this post by Gabor Szabo
On 02/12/2010 12:31 PM, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> The advantage of the slight reorganization of the layout and the addition of
> Makefile.PL or Build.PL is that then Bugzilla could be packaged to be uploaded
> to CPAN just as any other CPAN distribution and then you would gain the
> various additional features the CPAN ecosystem provides and the mind-share (!)
> of the CPAN authors.

        This is true, but currently all of our pages are separate CGI files, so
it's not like other web apps where there's a single .pl file that runs
under FastCGI and can reasonably installed in /usr/sbin/. Also, all of
our static web files are really static files, not handlers called
through a single point of access. The CPAN modules that I'm familiar
with don't provide any decent way of putting everything into a web
space, and with the current Bugzilla layout, all you have to do is untar
the tarball and you're basically good to go, in terms of layout.

> But you would get the reporting of the CPAN Testers which can be very nice.

        That would be good for sure.

        By the way, Bugzilla Extensions (that will be appearing in 3.6) are
designed in such a way that they can be packaged and distributed on CPAN.

> [hidden email] and on [hidden email] ?

        developers@ was originally a majordomo list. Then we moved to using a
newsgroup with a gateway, but we wanted to keep the primary address as
[hidden email].

        -Max
--
http://www.everythingsolved.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too.
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Gabor Szabo
In reply to this post by Max Kanat-Alexander
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Max Kanat-Alexander
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 02/11/2010 02:22 PM, Gabor Szabo wrote:
>> Maybe it is just me and no one of the other use.perl.org readers think
>> the same but I am still not sure if the Bugzilla team likes the fact
>> that it is written in Perl or that you hate every inch of it?
>
>        I think that we talked about this in one of our Bugzilla Meetings, and
> basically, Bugzilla is written in Perl, and it's written in Perl no
> matter whether each of us loves it or hates it.

If you mean the one that I was also involved then yes I remember a statement
similar to this one.

>        It's a programming language, a tool to and end. I don't think it's an
> emotional issue, it's just a technical fact that Bugzilla is in Perl.

I read this once in a while but then I see many people - maybe different ones,
maybe the same - act as if it was emotional.

Personally I think without emotions most people would not be involved in the
Perl (or any other) community.

>> Also - again IMHO - Bugzilla needs to send the message of using
>> *modern tools* in its development. (e.g. CVS  still being the
>> recommended way to fetch the source code is NOT sending this
>> messages).
>
>        The switch happened just days ago, and pretty much all the developer
> documentation is written by me, in addition to almost all the
> administrative details of the project being done by me, in addition to
> 50% or more of the development of the project being done by me, and I'm
> not getting paid for any of it. So yes, I agree that the documentation
> needs to be fixed, and it will be done soon.
>
>        However, CVS is still going to be easier for some people than bzr,
> because far more people are familiar with CVS. So we'll keep around some
> CVS instructions as well.

Err, I think there was a miscommunication on my part.
I was trying the stress that fact that the move to Bazar is a very
positive step.

Maybe technically it would be easier for many people to use CVS than to
learn the few basic commands Bazar needs to get started but I think the
emotions will quickly kick in. (Even with SVN I keep getting comments that
people are not involved in Padre because they want to use Git)


>> the local::lib/PERL5LIB stuff I am trying to patch,
>
>        You're actually the first person ever to mention a problem with it, I
> believe. :-) Otherwise we would have fixed it earlier.

Someone has to be the first one for every issue :-)

>> not using Makefile.PL or Build.PL,
>> not using "standard" CPAN layout:
>
>        Mmm, I tend to think that, at the moment, installation would actually
> become more difficult than it is now,

We could try to build a CPAN distro but explicitly turning off the
"install" target and telling people the installation is still the same
as earlier. That one could be uploaded do CPAN as a developer release
and then we could work out the specific issues with frequent new
developer releases to CPAN that mostly will try to address the
packaging and installation issues.

regards
   Gabor
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Max Kanat-Alexander
On 02/13/2010 07:41 AM, Gabor Szabo wrote:
>>        It's a programming language, a tool to and end. I don't think it's an
>> emotional issue, it's just a technical fact that Bugzilla is in Perl.
>
> I read this once in a while but then I see many people - maybe different ones,
> maybe the same - act as if it was emotional.
>
> Personally I think without emotions most people would not be involved in the
> Perl (or any other) community.

        Mmm, I think there are definitely a lot of people who get emotional
about it for sure. But ultimately it is a technical thing-- it's not
really like a painting or a song, where your emotional response and your
artistic sensibilities are *all* that matter, really. Still, I do
understand that people can have an emotional attachment to a programming
language. I don't, although I have spent some time with some members of
the Perl community and I like them quite a bit. :-) There's certainly an
emotional aspect to a community, so I agree with you there. :-)

> Err, I think there was a miscommunication on my part.
> I was trying the stress that fact that the move to Bazar is a very
> positive step.

        Ahh, thanks! :-)

> Maybe technically it would be easier for many people to use CVS than to
> learn the few basic commands Bazar needs to get started but I think the
> emotions will quickly kick in. (Even with SVN I keep getting comments that
> people are not involved in Padre because they want to use Git)

        Well, I think that we'll offer both for a while, so we'll see how
people respond.

> We could try to build a CPAN distro but explicitly turning off the
> "install" target and telling people the installation is still the same
> as earlier. That one could be uploaded do CPAN as a developer release
> and then we could work out the specific issues with frequent new
> developer releases to CPAN that mostly will try to address the
> packaging and installation issues.

        Yeah, but I'm worried that it would just increase our support burden,
which is something that I try to avoid. That is, there would be a lot of
people on the support list and in IRC going "I tried to install Bugzilla
and it didn't work...." and then we'd ask them what they did and they'd
say "I did 'install Bugzilla'....".

        One of the most important things to know about Bugzilla is that the
vast, vast majority of our users know nothing at all about Perl or CPAN,
so they have to always be provided installation options that are
straightforward, simple, and always work, or they run into a lot of
trouble and either decide not to use Bugzilla or decide to come to us
for support.

        -Max
--
http://www.everythingsolved.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too.
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Gabor Szabo
On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Max Kanat-Alexander
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 02/13/2010 07:41 AM, Gabor Szabo wrote:

>> Maybe technically it would be easier for many people to use CVS than to
>> learn the few basic commands Bazar needs to get started but I think the
>> emotions will quickly kick in. (Even with SVN I keep getting comments that
>> people are not involved in Padre because they want to use Git)
>
>        Well, I think that we'll offer both for a while, so we'll see how
> people respond.

That's the best.

>> We could try to build a CPAN distro but explicitly turning off the
>> "install" target and telling people the installation is still the same
>> as earlier. That one could be uploaded do CPAN as a developer release
>> and then we could work out the specific issues with frequent new
>> developer releases to CPAN that mostly will try to address the
>> packaging and installation issues.
>
>        Yeah, but I'm worried that it would just increase our support burden,
> which is something that I try to avoid. That is, there would be a lot of
> people on the support list and in IRC going "I tried to install Bugzilla
> and it didn't work...." and then we'd ask them what they did and they'd
> say "I did 'install Bugzilla'....".

As long as the version number on CPAN has an _ underscore in it,
the package is not included in the main index so regular people can not
install it but you can already collect the karma for uploading to CPAN.

Just make it clear in the CPAN upload and the accompanying blog entry
that it is the first experimental upload and full installation from CPAN
was not yet implemented.

>        One of the most important things to know about Bugzilla is that the
> vast, vast majority of our users know nothing at all about Perl or CPAN,
> so they have to always be provided installation options that are
> straightforward, simple, and always work, or they run into a lot of
> trouble and either decide not to use Bugzilla or decide to come to us
> for support.

Then I guess most of them won't install from CPAN anyway.
Also I think we (let me include myself in this) would like to increase
the number of Perl programmers using Bugzilla as that could lead more
volunteers to code.

Anyway, I'll first try to install Bugzilla so I won't just talk in the air and
then I'll try create the appropriate files and submit as a patch.

Gabor
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Max Kanat-Alexander
On 02/13/2010 10:55 AM, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> As long as the version number on CPAN has an _ underscore in it,
> the package is not included in the main index so regular people can not
> install it but you can already collect the karma for uploading to CPAN.
>
> Just make it clear in the CPAN upload and the accompanying blog entry
> that it is the first experimental upload and full installation from CPAN
> was not yet implemented.

        Okay, if you want to investigate the possibility of making Bugzilla
CPAN-installable and come up with a plan for it, then I'm open to the
possibility. I don't want to put it up on CPAN if we're eventually going
to abandon it there for unfeasability, though--I think that it would be
worse to have an abandoned package there than no package at all.

> Also I think we (let me include myself in this) would like to increase
> the number of Perl programmers using Bugzilla as that could lead more
> volunteers to code.

        Yeah, that's true for sure. :-)

> Anyway, I'll first try to install Bugzilla so I won't just talk in the air and
> then I'll try create the appropriate files and submit as a patch.

        Okay, sounds cool. :-)

        -Max
--
http://www.everythingsolved.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too.
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Gervase Markham
In reply to this post by Gabor Szabo
On 12/02/10 21:44, Max Kanat-Alexander wrote:
> However, CVS is still going to be easier for some people than bzr,
> because far more people are familiar with CVS. So we'll keep around some
> CVS instructions as well.

Is it really true that CVS will be easier for some people?

I see two constituencies:

- Users (that is, admins)
- Hackers

For users, it's just bzr co <url> <directory>, copied and pasted from
the installation web page. I can't see much advantage there. OK, if you
are in Windows, you have to install bzr - but you have to install CVS too.

For hackers, we don't allow them to commit to CVS anyway! So starting
with a CVS checkout just means you have to port your patches over later.

>> I am not sure if it should be done on http://bugzillaupdate.wordpress.com/
>> or on some other blog (maybe on http://blogs.perl.org/ ) but I am quite sure
>> the entires should appear on both http://ironman.enlightenedperl.org/ and on
>> http://perlsphere.net/ that are read by many people.
>
> This is certainly something to think about, and it's cool to have
> experienced suggestions from somebody with good experience in the area.

Bugzilla Update is low enough traffic that I think we should just submit
it to both these aggregators now, without worrying.

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Gervase Markham
In reply to this post by Gervase Markham
On 12/02/10 20:31, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> ps. Why do the replyes go to both
> [hidden email] and on [hidden email] ?

Historical reasons.

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Frédéric Buclin
In reply to this post by Gervase Markham
Le 15. 02. 10 12:28, Gervase Markham a écrit :
> Is it really true that CVS will be easier for some people?
>
> For users, it's just bzr co <url> <directory>, copied and pasted from
> the installation web page. I can't see much advantage there. OK, if you
> are in Windows, you have to install bzr - but you have to install CVS too.

There are some external tools or scripts which use CVS. And in the short
term, we have more urgent things to do than updating them to point to
and use bzr. So it still makes sense to keep CVS for now as a mirror,
and consequently CVS instructions.

LpSolit
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Colin Ogilvie
On 15/02/2010 11:37, Frédéric Buclin wrote:
> There are some external tools or scripts which use CVS. And in the
> short term, we have more urgent things to do than updating them to
> point to and use bzr. So it still makes sense to keep CVS for now as a
> mirror, and consequently CVS instructions.
Surely that means the solution is to then:

- Keep CVS for the scripts.
- Update instructions to use BZR.

Reasoning:
If CVS is staying as a permanent read-only access utility, then it's not
an issue.
However, if the plan is to ditch CVS such that it's not even
automatically updated from BZR, then the instructions should be changed
ASAP so that people don't start using CVS read-only versions, then find
they need to move it to BZR as that would just annoy them.

I'd also have said that updating the scripts should have been considered
as part of the CVS -> BZR move...

Colin
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Gervase Markham
In reply to this post by Gervase Markham
On 15/02/10 11:37, Frédéric Buclin wrote:
> There are some external tools or scripts which use CVS. And in the short
> term, we have more urgent things to do than updating them to point to
> and use bzr. So it still makes sense to keep CVS for now as a mirror,
> and consequently CVS instructions.

How does that "consequently" follow? If we need a CVS mirror for our own
purposes, sure. But why do we need to make people wanting to use
Bugzilla use CVS?

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=$MSGRCPT>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Frédéric Buclin
Le 15. 02. 10 16:14, Gervase Markham a écrit :
> How does that "consequently" follow? If we need a CVS mirror for our own
> purposes, sure. But why do we need to make people wanting to use
> Bugzilla use CVS?

People already using CVS to update their installation are external to
the core team. I have some scripts myself which also use CVS, and from
time to time I need to refresh my memory when I need to do something
manually. And I don't have the time currently to play with my scripts
and installations to make them work with bzr.

LpSolit
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: post FOSDEM

Max Kanat-Alexander
In reply to this post by Gervase Markham
On 02/15/2010 03:28 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> Is it really true that CVS will be easier for some people?

        Yes, people on old distros who can't install a new-enough version of
bzr, or where they don't have a distro package for bzr.

> Bugzilla Update is low enough traffic that I think we should just submit
> it to both these aggregators now, without worrying.

        Sure, that sounds reasonable. Do you want to do that, or should I?

        -Max
--
http://www.everythingsolved.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too.
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists@...>
123